Grand Valley Catholic Outreach Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200064007
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Grand Junction, CO, USA
Phone
9702413658
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,639,942
Expenses
$3,429,049
Assets
$24,112,534
Liabilities
$77,500

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAGE STORHEIM (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANE SCHISSEL (EXECUTIVE DI): $39,463 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To proclaim the dignity and worth of each person and respond to human needs, while striving to show the compassion of chirst. Providing food, clothing, and shelter to the chronically needy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grand valley catholic outreach provided food, clothing, and shelter to those in need as well as to those who are homeless in mesa county. 7 households received emergency transitional housing, and 84 individuals received permanent housing. 393 households were provided with financial assistance to prevent homelessness. 1,154 households were assisted with their utility payments. 10,315 people received showers, 9,761 received laundry services and 5,408 received medical attention at the outreach day center. 41,190 meals were served through the soup kitchen. The food pantry distributed 4,113 food boxes, providing food for 10,203 people. 124 individuals received transportation assistance. Referrals to other resources in the county were supplied to 753 guests. 27,360 individuals received free clothing. 30,474 mesa county citizens were supplied resources and counseling in their quest for obtaining affordable housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.8%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.1%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.03; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.8% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $39K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.